2019 IMSA WeatherTech SportsCar ChampionshipSports Cars 

  • Thread starter Northstar
  • 1,414 comments
  • 61,408 views
Refocusing a bit, here are my thoughts on the new season/Daytona:

I LOVED the retro liveries. Especially the Brumos colors on the #911 and #912. I only wish the integrated 59 was maybe smaller so the stripes looked a little stronger in color, but I understand the reference of course and love the idea as a whole. I wish Corvette had run the GM Goodwrench livery from 1999 as I think was mentioned in this thread. That thing was a beaut!!!

I'm gutted by the absences of Wright Motorsports, Spirit of Daytona, and the Red Dragon/Gainsco. I knew Gainsco had withdrawn, and I had forgotten about Spirit of Daytona being short on funding, but Wright Motorsports really caught me off guard. On the plus side, it's cool to see Starworks back - and even with Ryan Dalziel - although I expected to see them in a prototype. Still, the R8 looked good in retro Audi colors and even better with the pinup on the side.

I do not like the DPi/P2 split at all. It was not perfect, of course, but I felt IMSA had achieved a good level of equality last year with the BOP. The DPi's were better in some places, and the P2's were better in others. By splitting the classes, what you really do is force teams to decide if they want to compete for overall wins or be relegated to a secondary prototype class (hello PC).

Now you've got 4 cars among 2 or 3 teams and that's supposed to constitute a class? Terrible decision in my opinion. We finally get rid of the waste of space PC class only to replace it with P2.

If P2 grows [in the series] then I guess it can be viable on its own, but as is, it even wastes space on the screen during coverage. Each class had 5 positions listed on screen in the "main" layout. I rather liked it, but of course, P2 had 4 cars and a blank. That space could've been used for the 3 "real" classes to list more of them. I watched most of the race on DVR so I couldn't exactly bring up the running order live on a secondary source as it wouldn't have been synched to where I was in the race.

More importantly, I think 1 prototype and 2 GT classes works best for the series. Prototypes as one entity cause less confusion for casual fans trying to distinguish class differences, and 3 classes is more reasonable for sharing TV coverage time. I suppose I would be happy if P2 were limited to the 4 endurance races, but I still liked it better with DPi and P2 combined.
 
You must know that drivers have techniques for controlling the cars through puddles, which are commonly applied when full wet tires are fitted and water accumulates in lower parts of a track. Obviously, the blow dryers were working to restore the track to a condition where full wet compounds could operate. Anybody could tell lightyears away.



Much can happen in 10 minutes, so I disagree.



You misunderstood my point, but you're not the first to assume that I'm some psycho spectator. The track had been restored by those trucks to a condition where full wet tires could operate during the final minutes. This not only suggests that safety is better than years ago, but it also reinforces how driver safety matters more than ever. Despite of this, the race was not allowed to end properly.



It was quality racing by those who managed, exceptional actually.

Anyway, by now you must all realize that I do not disagree with the decision to stop the race when many drivers had weather-related incidents. What I disagree with is how the race didn't restart despite successful efforts to make it happen.



It has everything to do with it. Again, no one would have been in exceptional danger if allowed to race for the last 10 minutes or so. The call not to resume the race despite having restored the track was a disservice to the event.



Fair point in this case, but some drivers really need to back off with their tone and attitude, especially some of those brats from F1. Sometimes it's like they are giving commands to race control rather than providing feedback. To repeat a previous remark, there's a difference between voicing concern and repeatedly persuading with zero respect for an authority above you.



There's hardly any point in responding to this in great detail. Many of you seem to think I want to see drivers exposing themselves to danger. I surely don't. What I do want is the race to be resumed when it can be resumed safely. It didn't happen yesterday because race officials were being far too cautious. Yes, you can be far too cautious because all motorsport should be banned if you can't.

My experience on public roads is hardly relevant, but I know what race drivers have managed cope with over the years, including in recent years.



Have you never watched an endurance race where the results changed in the final minutes? Many things can happen that don't resemble NASCAR carnage.



Many who never even cared to watch a NASCAR race would disagree that close racing is boring.



I agree, but we can't have people like me questioning whether the right call was made. That makes me a whiner and some kind of pervert.
Just stop. Please.
 
This baby here laughs at the idea of a high strung 4 cylinder engine not being adequate:
Toyota-Eagle-GTP-Mk-III-49686.jpg


It's not the turbo 4 configuration that's the problem, it's that Mazda/AER's race engines are garbage, and have been for quite a while (hello Skyactiv Diesel). Incredibly fast in qualifying nowadays under certain circumstances sure (seeing how it's the only car to finally beat the MKIII's lap time), but no durability whatsoever.

Or see also the Porsche 919 as an example of how to build a high strung 4 cylinder powerplant for endurance racing.
 
This baby here laughs at the idea of a high strung 4 cylinder engine not being adequate:


It's not the turbo 4 configuration that's the problem, it's that Mazda/AER's race engines are garbage, and have been for quite a while (hello Skyactiv Diesel). Incredibly fast in qualifying nowadays under certain circumstances sure (seeing how it's the only car to finally beat the MKIII's lap time)

#7 Acura also beat the MKIII's lap record, just for the record :)
 
Yes, but IMSA GTOS are complete animals to the road cars, so still shocking to me.

There were plenty of 4 cylinder racers during that time that proved they could run high power long periods and win races.

As for the Mazda issue, as highlighted...AER is the problem. And this has been a big thing about them for years. I remember back in the day AER out qualified the Audi R8s in ALMS and then blew up in the race and I believe that was when AER was building the V8s
 
As for the Mazda issue, as highlighted...AER is the problem. And this has been a big thing about them for years. I remember back in the day AER out qualified the Audi R8s in ALMS and then blew up in the race and I believe that was when AER was building the V8s

They have a legacy of well over 15 years of building engine shaped grenades, all the way back when LMP2 was called LMP675, with Dyson and Intersport running the "MG" Lolas that had the life expectancy of an ice cream cone in 100F weather (Although IIRC, Intersport ended up putting a Judd V8 in their car at some point with not much better results). The few times they ran properly though, they were amazingly quick.

--

Finally got done watching the Michelin Pilot Challenge race... Pretty amazing race all things considered, though I think the McLarens are going to get BOP'd quite heavily for the next round...
 
This baby here laughs at the idea of a high strung 4 cylinder engine not being adequate:
Toyota-Eagle-GTP-Mk-III-49686.jpg


It's not the turbo 4 configuration that's the problem, it's that Mazda/AER's race engines are garbage, and have been for quite a while (hello Skyactiv Diesel). Incredibly fast in qualifying nowadays under certain circumstances sure (seeing how it's the only car to finally beat the MKIII's lap time), but no durability whatsoever.

Or see also the Porsche 919 as an example of how to build a high strung 4 cylinder powerplant for endurance racing.
I think the current Super GT GT500 cars also do a decent job of dispelling the myth that high strung 4-cylinder turbos can’t cut the mustard.
 
There were plenty of 4 cylinder racers during that time that proved they could run high power long periods and win races.
To be clear, I never said that 4-cylinders couldn't be as capable as V8s on the track. I just assumed that all Ford based IMSA cars switched to V8s by the late 80s, my mistake. It's a fun thing to learn though. 👍
 
Two legendary 4 bangers.


Offenhauser - dominated Indy for decades. Block and crankcase machined from one piece billets.


1300 horsepower from 1.5 liters - for one lap. Iron block. Last production-based engine to win in F1.
 
While I agree AER is more or less the pinnacle of fast but fragile, I also get the feeling that them still being in the Mazda (as well as in the back of the Rebellion LMP1s, which just makes me go "Have you guys not learned?") reeks abit of "We don't want to spend money on a good engine".
 
Finally got done watching the Michelin Pilot Challenge race... Pretty amazing race all things considered, though I think the McLarens are going to get BOP'd quite heavily for the next round...
I'm not so sure on that. McLarens had the straight line speed, but were terrible on the brakes to make up for it. Shouldn't be an issue at tracks that aren't Daytona.
 
To be clear, I never said that 4-cylinders couldn't be as capable as V8s on the track. I just assumed that all Ford based IMSA cars switched to V8s by the late 80s, my mistake. It's a fun thing to learn though. 👍

I know you didn't my post was to illustrate that IMSA wasn't the only place doing this at the time and that the entire evolution even back then showed impressive ability for future race cars.

They have a legacy of well over 15 years of building engine shaped grenades, all the way back when LMP2 was called LMP675, with Dyson and Intersport running the "MG" Lolas that had the life expectancy of an ice cream cone in 100F weather (Although IIRC, Intersport ended up putting a Judd V8 in their car at some point with not much better results). The few times they ran properly though, they were amazingly quick.

Yeah, exactly as I said in the post. If they could find a way to get rid of AER I'd hope they would take it but I'm guessing there isn't an option currently.
 
Back